The Free Energy Device Handbook

luics aiiu alums co wen us mr uii^vm ¡iccivcmy im/vik::.

and to all matter in the universe in any phase of its existence from its very formation to its ultimate disintegration."

"A few words will be sufficient in support of this contention. The kinetic and potential energy of a ix>dy is the result of motion and determined by the product of its mass and the square of velocity. Let the mass be reduced, the energy is diminished in the same proportion. If it be reduced to zero, the energy is likewise zero for any finite velocity. In other words, it is absolutely impossible to convert mass into energy. It would be different if there were forces in nature capable of imparting to a mass infinite velocity. Then the product of zero mass with the square oi infinite velocity would represent infinite energy, tku we know thai there are no such forces and the idea that mass is convertible into energy is rank nonsense."

Nikola Tesla's statement of li September 1932, New York Herald Tribune is:

The assumption of the Maxwellian ether was thought necessary to explain the propagation of light by transverse vibrations, which can only ixx:ui in a solid. So fascinating was this theory that even at present it lias many supporters, despite the maniiest impossibility of a medium, perfectly mobile and tenuous to a degree inconceivable, and yet extremely rigid, like steel. As a result, some illusionary ideas have been formed and various phenomena erroneously interpreted. The so-called Hertz waves are still considered a reality, proving that light is electrical in its nature, and also that the ether is capable of transmitting transverse vibrations of

Free Magnetic Field Energy


frequencies however low. This view has become untenable, since I showed that the universal medium is a gaseous body in which only longitudinal pulses can be propagated, involving alternating compressions and expansions similar to those produced by sound waves in the air. Thus, a wireless transmitter does not emit Hertz waves, which are a myth, but sound waves in the ether, behaving in every respect like those in the air, except that, owing to the great elastic force and extremely small density of the medium, their speed is that of light."

Although personal friends, Tesla and Einstein did not always agree with each other on certain points. However what Tesla is saying here is that though E=Mc2, you can't simply choose a lump of mass such as a permanent magnet, place it in a system and extract energy from it. As aforesaid, in Tesla's own words, "the idea that mass is convertible into energy is rank nonsense."


The term 'efficiency' or efficiency losses' relative to an external sourcc, loses ail substance of meaning when considering dcvices capable of well beyond unity. The term is no longer a yardstick, so to speak, as it becomes a relic of establishment teachings and present-day so-called conservation of energy laws, which now require to be rewritten. We must, therefore, now have a negentropy law.

Losses, if indeed any exist in a beyond-unity device, would be minuscule and of no substance, due to the output capacity of the device.

In my opinion, the most salient factor to look for in a device claimed to operate beyond unity, is its operating temperature under full load. This factor tells all, without the initial necessity to carry out exhaustive test procedures.

The matter of temperature of beyond-unity devices brings to mind Tesla's electric car. It is stated in my notes that the machine becomes very hot during operation. This, of course, is to be expected, as the 'free-energy section' of the machine is a separate entity to the car motor proper, and in the year 1931, when Tesla tested his "Pierce Arrow" car, conventional DC motors were notoriously inefficient—around the order of 35%—and, incidentally, meanwhile, haven't improved that much. In addition, the confined space would have also been of no help, even with the assistance of a fan, which also had to be used according to his notes.

However, in contrast, my beyond-unity power device ('gravity generator') would be operating at least 20-40° Centigrade below ambient.

As the father of many discoveries and inventions pertaining to coils, transformers, pulsing systems and electric motors, on reflection it is unfortunate that Tesla hadn't figured out what could be done with his pulsing systems in relation to electric motors. Had he done so, he would not have required (according to Miiller) powerful magnets or a cooling fan.

It is my opinion, after many years' experience in the free-energy research field, that a table of negative time/negative energy 'rating' be formulated in relation to devices using permanent magnets in free-energy applications. I am, at present, endeavouring to work out a system of magnetic radiation field strength measurement as a possible means of evaluating rotary devices that utilise permanent magnets. A system of this nature would distinguish 'beyond-unity shoptalk' from 'conventional shoptalk' and the term 'efficiency' would remain relegated to conventional devices. As the future 'beyond-unity empire' will grow and mature, so conventionalism, along with its present terminology, will wither and die.

The universe is negentropically organised and is proceeding transfinitely from disorder to order. This is not the concept of energy taught today in college and university campuses which persist in drumming in the long since foregone notions of Sir Isaac Newton and James Clerke Maxwell. We are, right this very moment, entering a new era of science, somewhat divorced from the trappings the establishment has been peddling for decades. We do not need to 'wait upon' the establishment to catch up to us here, for if we did we would still be a century behind in a century's time. It is for the establishment teachings






to latch onto us, which they will do—eventually—one day. In the meantime, new science will continue to forge ahead regardless, until sheer embarrassment will force classical teaching out the door.

With anti-gravity/beyond-unity devices, we must now go on to reconstitute our scientific laws and introduce a few new ones. As aforementioned, one being a negentropy law within which we must now go on to agree to the use of a more appropriate term of measurement for devices using permanent magnets in free-energy applications; and, as aforesaid, the term 'rating' comes to mind. For the purpose of this treatise I will now propose to use the term 'beyond-unity rating' or 'BUR' as an abbreviation, for the moment.

Beyond-unity devices' 'ratings' should, in my opinion, be according to an accepted table of values, ranging from what is, at present, termed 'unity' upwards, and thereby dumping the term 'efficiency' completely.

As there is no upper limit of negative energy other than 'blastoff and/or 'self-annihilation' upon reaching absolute resonance, then a suitable table of values, with a suitable baseline, would be a practical solution. As the term 'unity' has been so indelibly engrained, then it would perhaps be suitable as a 'base'.

No doubt the establishment will 'perform' at my suggestions and/or recommendations on this—so be it. It would only take a small section of the researchers of new science amongst the 'beyond-unity circle' to agree upon the adoption of a new system of measurement and/or definition and publish it internationally along with the appropriate table of figure ratings. This would then enable beyond-unity researchers and adherents alike a more realistic platform as a base to work from, whilst still allowing the term 'efficiency' to apply to conventional below-

unity apparatus.

This adoption of a new and separate system (or law) of the measurement of over-unity devices will, at the outset, identify and distinguish the subject of beyond-unity from its conventional counterparts and allow beyond-unity and anti-gravity researchers to get on with the job without harrassmcm from the classical thinkers.

Solar Power

Solar Power

Start Saving On Your Electricity Bills Using The Power of the Sun And Other Natural Resources!

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment